I'd say remove them completely. The reason for leaving them in an
appendix, as my memory of Vancouver comes back slowly, was as sort of a
normative statement of what a reasonable level of internationalization
support DOM users should expect from their language/OS platform if they are
REALLY serious about having their dynamic content work properly no matter
what language the content is in.
p.s. What happened to the minutes of the String/Character discussion in
At 10:44 AM 9/17/97 -0700, Steve Byrne wrote:
>Gavin Nicol writes:
> > >I have a distinct recollection that we agreed to remove the String and
> > >Character classes in Vancouver, but I can't find any of the
> > >String/Character discussion in the minutes. Didn't we decide that
> > >in Unicode's court, not ours?
>I remember we talked about this, but I couldn't find the outcome minuted.
> > No, we agreed to make them an appendix. When I was reading the recent
> > draft (as with the earlier one), I found many errors in the descriptions.
> > I figure we should just drop them, as save the trouble of fixing the
> > descriptions.
>What do other folks feel about this? Should we a) remove them completely, b)
>remove them but leave a note (as I guess we're doing for Selections) that
>be adding this functionality into level 1 at a later date (on the assumption
>that it's better to not publish something than to publish something with
>errors), or c) something else? I'm happy to go whichever way the group
>decides, but I'd like to make sure I won't be doing something
>someone before I do it.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:36 EDT